backtop


Print 76 comment(s) - last by lexluthermiest.. on Jul 2 at 9:39 PM


Sprint CEO Dan Hesse
Hesse feels he is fighting for Sprint's survival and the industry

The biggest wireless announcement of the year was AT&T's proposed purchase of T-Mobile that would make it the largest carrier in the U.S. While the merger is expected to get the green light by regulators, some in the industry think that the merger is bad for the industry.

Sprint is working hard to get the merger blocked and is pulling out all of the stops to accomplish its mission. Not only does Sprint think that its survival is at stake, but the company wants everyone to believe that the purchase of T-Mobile by AT&T will be disastrous for the industry and consumers. Sprint CEO Dan Hesse is working to find any way possible to block the purchase from having Sprint's own engineers tell AT&T how it could increase its capacity to hiring lobbyists and courting other CEO's to stand against the deal.

Many think that the only thing Sprint can hope for is to force the FCC and other regulators to impose conditions on the purchase that would make it better for Sprint. Sprint CEO Dan Hesse said, "Clearly, purely, we want to win and block the merger. This one poses real risks."

The issue for Sprint as a company is that the merged AT&T/T-Mobile carrier and Verizon could make Sprint unable to compete for new devices and on price, ultimately forcing the company out of business. Hesse has already admitted that Sprint's survival as an independent is in doubt if the purchase goes through.

Hesse continues, "The industry just won’t be as innovative and as dynamic as it has been. It’ll gum up the works when everything has to go through these two big tollbooths, one that’s called AT&T and one that’s called Verizon."

While Sprint and Hesse argue against the deal, AT&T says that the merger would be better for consumers. The purchase would allow AT&T to make more investments in networks and future technologies according to AT&T. AT&T General Counsel Wayne Watts said, "Their arguments about prices going up just defy economic logic. We’ve had wireless transactions multiple times over the last ten years and prices have gone one direction: they’ve gone down."

Many note that while AT&T has promised it will use the purchase to improve wireless broadband access, there is no way to force a company to stand up to promises made. The only way to enforce promises would be for the Justice Department to place conditions on the merger and if they conditions aren't met AT&T could be taken to court.

Many believe that Sprint's concerns are being heard by the decision makers.  Whether or not they are enough to block the sale remains to be seen. The FCC and Congress are grilling AT&T on the purchase looking for any possible downside to the buyout.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Meh...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/28/2011 6:30:39 PM , Rating: 1
You really need to give it up. This is a HUGE story and what Edwards done is not excusable. Fox isn't the first, or last, to tee-up somebody when they get caught like this.

We don't care that he had a mistress or a love child. We care that he spent almost a million dollars of our money on this mess. And a complete host of utterly damning charges that were totally proven.

And here you are worried that the public "tolerates" news stories? How about a public that tolerates this kind of gross abuse of elected positions!? That's what you should be concerned about.

There is a time and place for everything. Your witch hunt of Fox is way misplaced here. As usual.


RE: Meh...
By Hyperion1400 on 6/28/2011 8:08:11 PM , Rating: 3
He is referring to the 2004 Kerry/Edwards campaign, not the current debacle, which is, wholly justified. Or, have you forgotten the term "Swiftboating" already?


RE: Meh...
By Iaiken on 6/28/2011 9:46:52 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah well, this wouldn't be the first wrong/stupid conclusion Reclaimer has jumped all over while frothing at the mouth.


RE: Meh...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/28/2011 10:12:56 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Yeah well, this wouldn't be the first wrong/stupid conclusion Reclaimer has jumped all over while frothing at the mouth.


No, the problem is I have a hard time reading your posts in entirety because they're all so much bullshit. Reading comprehension requires something worth comprehending.


RE: Meh...
By Iaiken on 6/29/2011 12:49:17 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
No, the problem is I have a hard time reading your posts in entirety because they're all so much bullshit.


Likewise! :D


RE: Meh...
By Hyperion1400 on 6/29/2011 3:32:24 PM , Rating: 1
Ah, the TL;DR defense. You know, it usually says more about the person using it, than the person it is intended to insult?


RE: Meh...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/29/2011 7:46:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A great example was the 24-7/all-media smear-fest where Fox targeted John Edwards. It probably would have found it comical if it hadn't been so terrifying.


This is all he said. If you're talking about a specific point in time, maybe you should use a DATE?

Anyone reading this would have assumed the same thing I did, because the Edwards thing is a big CURRENT story.

Again, it's poor writing skills. He was cryptic, vague, and not conveying to the reader the specific point in time we're all supposed to read his mind and infer. In fact if someone has to infer anything in a debate, you have failed.

Maybe he walks around with events back in 2004 fresh in his mind, because he's an anal gasbag, but most of us don't.


RE: Meh...
By Hyperion1400 on 6/29/2011 8:26:19 PM , Rating: 2
Or maybe you should have seen that he was speaking in the past tense and the current Edwards debacle is still very much current?

quote:
In fact if someone has to infer anything in a debate, you have failed. Maybe he walks around with events back in 2004 fresh in his mind, because he's an anal gasbag, but most of us don't.


No, the moment you have to resort to personal attacks instead of sticking to facts is the moment you have failed.


RE: Meh...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/30/2011 2:44:00 PM , Rating: 2
Past tense could have meant he saw Fox doing it yesterday or last week or an hour ago. Why would anyone be meant to assume he was talking about YEARS ago?


RE: Meh...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/28/2011 10:06:52 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't that around the same time that ABC and Dan Rather completely forged documents and knowingly crafted a Bush-bashing story and ran with it? Memogate?

I can think of nothing more prejudicial or corrupt in media than what transpired there. Yet Ilaken continues his oblivious crusade against Fox.


RE: Meh...
By mcnabney on 6/29/2011 10:02:25 AM , Rating: 2
Dan didn't forge anything, but he and his producers didn't do enough to investigage the source of the documents. They just ran with it. Fox does this every day, and later mentions that their source was mistaken - after the damage is done.


RE: Meh...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/29/2011 10:46:28 AM , Rating: 2
Nice try. Rather himself even asserted that, and I quote, "that "the material" had been authenticated by experts retained by CBS." When in fact no such authentication had been done. They knowingly used forged documents, they continued to defend the stories validity TWO WEEKS after the documents authenticity was called into question.

It was a completely manufactured hatchet job from start to finish. No other possible conclusion can objectively be drawn.

To say "Fox does this every day" is a criminal allegation that you're going to have to back up. If they did this every day, we would know about it, people would be fired and lawsuits would be filed.


RE: Meh...
By Nutzo on 6/29/2011 11:11:51 AM , Rating: 2
Ignore the troll, he just can't handle the truth.


"We shipped it on Saturday. Then on Sunday, we rested." -- Steve Jobs on the iPad launch

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki